>> I would not say that AMSAT has abandoned HEO. Rather, launch
> opportunities that exist now are being utilized. Would you rather sit
> dormant and let all existing birds fail or re-enter while waiting for an
> HEO opportunity?
> And AMSAT is just learning to build cubesats. For AMSAT-NA, Fox-1 is a
> first. If we're going to fly HEO, we had better be good at building a
> reliable satellite in a cubesat (be it 1, 3, or 6U) format. The first HEO
> launch opportunity is not the time to figure that out!
> While HEO launch opportunities do not exist now, but that does not mean
> that AMSAT isn't pursuing them as Drew pointed out, nor that AMSAT would
> not build an HEO satellite when opportunities do come. In the meantime, we
> are making lemonade and preparing through practice.
I cannot agree with this more. The reality is that LEO launch opportunities
exist right now for an affordable price that AMSAT can pay (free to ~$150K)
for satellites that are 1U cubesats. Any larger and it becomes much more
expensive. AMSAT could potentially pull of a HEO launch if a 3U or so
cubesat but I would imagine a decently sized fundraising campaign would be
needed to approach that. Anything bigger than cubesats is likely out of the
range of an organization such as AMSAT for a while (Unless reusable launch
vehicles becomes a reality <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2t15vP1PyoA>).
There's a silver lining that people are neglecting (and those of us
volunteering for AMSAT should probably do a better job publicizing
this...). This silver lining is that without necessity, technology would
never move forward. We are now forced to build LEO cubesats if we want to
fly anything soon. That's a fact of life. By developing a reliable cubesat
that is technology dense with smaller components and systems on a chip and
placing it into LEO we obtain a flight heritage and incremental
improvements with design. This also gives volunteers/engineers the
experience with the satellite design. *There is merit in attempting to pack
all the technology that is found on a traditional HEO bird into a small
cubesat*. I mean seriously, we have smartphones nowadays that are faster
than supercomputers were just several decades ago.
When that HEO opportunity comes up.* A proven LEO satellite with flight
heritage will be much more reliable and economical to upgrade for the task*.
It is for this reason that the path AMSAT-NA is currently embarking on is a
very smart one for the current aerospace industry. Any Fox satellite
designed and operated for it's 5+ year mission will give a huge leap of
flight heritage to the design, especially in regards to radiation and
environmental concerns. A HEO satellite will need to be extremely robust,
more so than LEO as it will experience more radiation.
So LEO satellites are fun to most of us but they do offer an extremely
limited usable pass,even at best (especially FM). However, there are many
subsystems on an FM LEO that would be very similar to a Linear Transponder
HEO satellite.* You still need a computer (IHU), you still need a solar
converter (MPPT), you still need to support any experiments (cameras,
sensors, etc). So, by having a reliable and flight proven LEO family of
satellites, you just set yourself up for a HEO mission with limited
redesign.*
This also plays into the whole role of launch providers. Just because you
can afford a launch doesn't mean you will get it. Let's say AMSAT obtained
a ride to GTO on the next Direct TV satellite to launch. Direct TV is the
primary payload and any secondary payloads MUST prove that they will not in
any way jeapordize the primary payload. If AMSAT was unable to prove that
its satellite will not affect the primary payload, AMSAT would likely not
get to fly.
Anyways, these are my thoughts on the issue. I'll toy around with the idea
of getting some better material for the AMSAT-NA website to explain some of
the difficulties AMSAT faces. There really is a need for a better
explanation so we can avoid consistently explaining similar responses to
similar questions.
Enjoy!
Bryce
KB1LQC
On Wed, Sep 4, 2013 at 3:09 PM, n0jy <n0jy at n0jy.org> wrote:
> Hi Michael,
>> I would not say that AMSAT has abandoned HEO. Rather, launch
> opportunities that exist now are being utilized. Would you rather sit
> dormant and let all existing birds fail or re-enter while waiting for an
> HEO opportunity?
> And AMSAT is just learning to build cubesats. For AMSAT-NA, Fox-1 is a
> first. If we're going to fly HEO, we had better be good at building a
> reliable satellite in a cubesat (be it 1, 3, or 6U) format. The first HEO
> launch opportunity is not the time to figure that out!
> While HEO launch opportunities do not exist now, but that does not mean
> that AMSAT isn't pursuing them as Drew pointed out, nor that AMSAT would
> not build an HEO satellite when opportunities do come. In the meantime, we
> are making lemonade and preparing through practice.
>> Jerry
> N0JY
>>> On 9/4/2013 4:25 PM, Michael wrote:
>>> I'm almost fifty one years old and I'm now convinced that we will not see
>> another HEO in orbit in my lifetime...if ever. The economic environment to
>> do it just doesn't exist anymore. AMSAT has as much as told everyone that
>> by abandoning their efforts and concentrating on LEO cubesats. No one is
>> going to come out and say that we absolutely will never have one, they like
>> to keep that glimmer of hope alive but the writing is on the wall. No one
>> wants to be wrong more than I do but I'd bet you P3-E never flies.
>> 73,
>> Michael, W4HIJ
>>>> On 9/3/2013 3:32 PM, John Becker wrote:
>>>>> Anything new on a replacement.
>>> Have not see a thing myself.
>>>>>> John
>>>>>>>>> ______________________________**_________________
>>> Sent via AMSAT-BB at amsat.org. Opinions expressed are those of the author.
>>> Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite
>>> program!
>>> Subscription settings: http://amsat.org/mailman/**listinfo/amsat-bb<http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb>
>>>>>>> ______________________________**_________________
>> Sent via AMSAT-BB at amsat.org. Opinions expressed are those of the author.
>> Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program!
>> Subscription settings: http://amsat.org/mailman/**listinfo/amsat-bb<http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb>
>>>>>>> ______________________________**_________________
> Sent via AMSAT-BB at amsat.org. Opinions expressed are those of the author.
> Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program!
> Subscription settings: http://amsat.org/mailman/**listinfo/amsat-bb<http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb>
>